| 26 Feb 2026 |
 chreekat | So, I will carry on dreaming 😄 | 15:37:30 |
 toonn | Recursive Nix was another such dream. | 16:00:06 |
 maralorn | Isn’t even basically the same? | 16:10:26 |
| toonn | Both of them and IFD basically achieve the same thing AFAIK. | 16:12:31 |
| toonn | Different trade-offs to reach at least similar goals. | 16:12:49 |
 sterni | we can't even do that since the database is not available at eval time (it's a derivation after all) | 16:13:04 |
| sterni | but yes, we need to figure out the latest package version and revision for a package with the sha256 hash of the cabal file (in case it is revised) and the sdist when generating hackage-packages.nix | 16:14:24 |
| sterni | I don't know if historically something was missing from the cabal-install database or restricting it to a specific state was too complicated, but it seems like we can get all the information we need from the index now. | 16:16:10 |
| sterni | with the slight downside that it needs to be managed on the developer's machine by cabal-install since there's no way to fetch a specific version of the index | 16:16:43 |
| sterni | I think we are going to need all-cabal-hashes going forward for callHackage anyway, a nicer alternative there would be useful | 16:17:05 |
 teo (they/he) | Yeah good point!
Tbh maybe we could just require people put the hash into the callHackage call and then not have to do any of this? | 16:19:23 |
| sterni | yeah that already exists | 16:41:17 |
| sterni | i think retaining that feature is not that interesting since the snapshot you’re getting is always outdated by a week at least | 16:42:11 |
| maralorn | idk, sometimes you want a newer version of something which is pinned in stackage but the newest _version doesn’t cut it. | 17:00:45 |
| maralorn | I use the hash based pinning quite regularly. | 17:00:58 |
| 27 Feb 2026 |
|  Deepak Maharana joined the room. | 01:23:13 |
|  amadaluzia[tde] changed their profile picture. | 03:52:45 |
|  amadaluzia changed their profile picture. | 03:55:20 |
 dotlambda | I want to drop the broken (even if it weren't marked insecure) package psftools but haskellPackages.HDRUtils depends on it. How do I go about removing that package too? | 05:29:19 |
| dotlambda | Since HDRUtils is already in the dont-distribute-packages list, should I simply remove the librarySystemDepends line from hackage-packages.nix manually? | 05:34:24 |
| dotlambda | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/494601 | 05:41:01 |
| maralorn | Editing hackage-packages.nix is never the correct solution. | 09:45:39 |
| maralorn | Question would be: If HDRUtils is already under dont-distribute do you even need to do anything? | 09:46:36 |
| maralorn | I might be wrong but when you remove psftools and we rerun hackage2nix I think it would automatically set psftools = null in the package input. | 09:47:53 |
|  Ember Void changed their display name from Void Ember to Ember Void. | 11:29:02 |
 Artem | has anyone ever seen this error when trying to do a basic cabal install:
Version mismatch between ghc and ghc-pkg: /run/current-system/sw/bin/ghc is version 9.8.4 /nix/store/vqkj90qn7489hcixgy5ah2mv59g72a14-ghc-9.10.3/bin/ghc-pkg-9.10.3 is version 9.10.3
I don't have anything fancy in the NixOS config, I think: just ghc and cabal-install ins systemPackages...
| 16:21:06 |
| Artem | * has anyone ever seen this error when trying to do a basic cabal install:
Version mismatch between ghc and ghc-pkg: /run/current-system/sw/bin/ghc is version 9.8.4
/nix/store/vqkj90qn7489hcixgy5ah2mv59g72a14-ghc-9.10.3/bin/ghc-pkg-9.10.3 is version 9.10.3
I don't have anything fancy in the NixOS config, I think: just ghc and cabal-install ins systemPackages...
| 16:21:21 |
| Artem | * has anyone ever seen this error when trying to do a basic cabal install:
Version mismatch between ghc and ghc-pkg:
/run/current-system/sw/bin/ghc is version 9.8.4
/nix/store/vqkj90qn7489hcixgy5ah2mv59g72a14-ghc-9.10.3/bin/ghc-pkg-9.10.3 is version 9.10.3
I don't have anything fancy in the NixOS config, I think: just ghc and cabal-install ins systemPackages...
| 16:21:33 |
| Artem | I'm on 25.11 so it should be just 9.10.3 | 16:22:04 |
| Artem | wow, it looks like it's a regression in cabal HEAD (which I daily-drive by default). cabal 3.16.1.0 does the right thing | 17:36:11 |
